Pristine is
a name implying cleanliness, originality, beauty. How
about a behemoth amplifier from Singapore? How about
100 watts of solid state class A sound? How
about an amp that is built like a brick, er, house and looks pretty cool? My fiancé really liked the looks of this amp, with its
swooshing sine wave on the front and its violet-colored power indicator light. She really liked the sound, too.

The Pristine
SA10 weighs nearly 80 pounds and is sufficiently large that audiophiles thinking about
placing it in a rack will have to do some measuring first. Ive
been sort of tire kicking amplifiers, looking for more power for my watt-sucking ATCs, but
I wasnt really thinking physically BIG. Nor
did I consider the Pristine as a possible upgrade, since it is only 100 watts. However, hearing the Prisitne made me rethink my
priorities. The Pristine is one of those solid state
amps that conjures up impressions of tube sound. Having
heard the 200-watt E.A.R. 549 mono tube amplifiers (at a mere $14,000) in my system, I can
say unequivocally that the Pristine doesnt sound precisely like a tube amplifier. However, if tube power implies a less edgy, fuller, and
more liquid sound than most solid state amps, then the Pristine is tube-like. While I had the Pristine, I also borrowed the solid state
Chord SPM1200B amp, which is 250 watts of thunder and lightning. Compared to the Chord, the Pristine again sounded a bit
tube-like.

he Chord
sounded vivid, but in a way I really liked, while the Pristine was more relaxed. The Pristine delivered throaty, chesty renditions
of both males and females. My thirst for rock
n roll, like Led Zep, Van Halen, et al., is fairly low at this point in time,
so I cant say how they sounded with that kind of music. However, rock of another variety, like Ry Cooder, Tom
Waits, and Live (the group), or female vocals like The Story (hardly rock, I
know) or Liz Phairs Exile in Guyville, was rendered with a slight softening
of edge and tone, but this worked. No doubt Zep or
Aerosmith would also have been sweetened a little. These
days, Im not expecting the edge or bite that goes with grinding guitars, so if that
isnt in the Pristines presentation, Im not missing it. I think that the Pristine, an expensive product, will
land happily in the hands of people who have the wherewithal (um, dough) to spring for it. I expect these people arent listening to Metallica,
etc. Theyll be listening to jazz, more pop-ish
sounding rock, or classical music. With these
varieties, the Pristine will likely be a joy, delivering a clear delineation of
instruments in complex passages, doing a very nice job representing orchestral crescendos,
and so on.

To conclude
about the tube-like characteristics of the Pristine, the top end was a little er, um...
rolled off. There was detail, but I have heard and
experienced more extended treble, for instance with the Chord. The Pristine was timbrally appropriate and realistic,
just not as extended as some amps. The
similarly-priced Chord was clearer and more precise, while not being etched. The Pristine was a bit more delicate, and had a sort of
liquidity that I associate with a well-rendered midrange.

The Pristine
imaged as well as anything non-tubed Ive had in my system. Images were represented in a rock-solid three-dimensional
soundstage. As liabilities goand I found
fewthe bottom end was pleasant but a bit over-full and very slightly indistinct. The Pristines bottom end is distinctly a step up
from my Musical Design amplifier, but was less deep than with the Chord, and slightly less
focused. If your system leans in the direction of
indistinct bass, or requires a bit more control than other speakers, the Pristine may not
be indicated.

In short, the
Pristine is a very nice product. At its suggested
price of around $5000, it is not inexpensive. It is,
however, something to look into. The build and look
of the amp are appropriate for its price, as is the sound. Alas,
the imbroglio created by my having the Pristine, the Chord, and the E.A.R. 549s (at a LOT
more money) is that Im starting back at square one. Oh,
I still love my ATCs. Seeing what a wonderful
amplifier like the Pristine could do with them was a treat. I dont think the Pristine sounds like a tube amplifier, although it does
sound wonderful. However, hearing the difference
between tubes and wonderful solid state, I think I want tubes. You may want something Pristine. Both are wonderful, it is just a matter of taste. Larry
Cox

The Pristine
amplifiers looks are very deceiving. Not only
is this is a very beautiful amplifier to look at, but its quality of fit and finish is in
a class by itself. To be perfectly honest,
however, it is very ho-hum to listen to. While it
did nothing really wrong, it did very little to excite the spirit. This is a harsh, perhaps, but then the Pristine is an
expensive amplifier. The music it produces is more
heavy than light, more ponderous than lively, noticeably slower than swift, and more
rounded than defined. While it is not dark or
recessed, the music is just not "there" in the room. I felt that I was more of an observer than a
participant when listening to music. A bad thing? Yes, if you want music brought to life. A good thing? Yes,
if your speakers are lean, bass shy, or bright, or if you find yourself leaning more to
the more dull side of life.

Bass was deep
and very ample, but not well controlled or defined. It
was loose and lacked slam when compared to the less powerful Clayton M70s and Naked Truth
Audio Callas. Using a barrage of bass-driven track from
Laswell to Massive Attack to whatever would rock the house, showed the Prisitine to not be
in the same "bass" class as either of these two amps. As such these discs and
others of their ilk lost much in terms of visceral slam and punch. Music was
turgid and
slowerforget PRAT, how about fat? What should
rock, instead rolled around the room. What's the deal? Are not powerful more
watts the better? Maybe, but in this case definitely not in terms of bass control and
definition. No doubt an issue of design, but the Prisitne is not going to win any
bass-wars with other amps in its price class. I would mate this with less
"full-range" speakers where its looser and fuller sound would mitigate the
leaness and limited bass output of smaller speakers. Say horns. Hey it does come from
Asia, so perhaps that is the right match? Smaller rooms with limited bandwidth speakers!

The more
neutral Clayton and NTA amps were way more involving, bringing a considerably greater
degree of life to the music. The Pristine comes
across as darker and way too rich for my blood. Like I said, the Pristine may work with a
leaner system, or one that needs help in the lowest frequencies (can you say
"Plump?"), but our system does not fit the bill, and the Pristine pushed the
sonic needle in the wrong direction.

Though it
sounded smooth and grain free, the problem continues further up, where it had an overly
warm and rich midrange. All an issue of the plump
bottom end? Perhaps. But I think the amp as a whole has been voiced to offer a different
take on what music should sound likeno doubt an issue of the speaker used
or at least those it is intended to work with. But hey, who doesn't do just that with any
product they design? After all we all hear differently and each of us may value this over
thatso what works for me may not work for you. Oh well back to the review...

Almost like
vintage tube gear, the Pristine had that "burnished" quality that made our
recordings sound more alike than different. This is
not an amplifier to resolve the finer details on your discs, nor will it allow you to hear
deep into the soundfield. The highs do sound
rolled-off a bit and with the overall fullness the Pristine is more of an amp to
have on in the background or to fill the room with overly rich and romantic classics from
years gone by, then to listen to with a critical ear. I could never see myself using this
amp as a reference. Just not enough to get my juices flowing.

Okay, I know
this sounds like a pan, but in defense of the Pristine, it will never offend the listener.
This is one of those amps that you can listen to forever and never nary a trace of
fatigue. And the music still can be well served, but one has to consider the speakers and
ancillary components. Use brighter and leaner
speakers with cabling of similar traits, plus a source that is more analytical than
musical, and things might really start to gel. Is
the Pristine musically satisfying? In the right
system, I would have to say yes. Is it worth the
asking price? Most certainly in terms of build
quality, but in terms of sound, well it is not the amp for us. Dave Clark

Listening
to the Pristine amplifier was the equivalent of an audio blind date. I knew nothing of its
origins, design characteristics, mode of operation, or inner workings. I can tell you
this, however: the solid state Pristine costs $5000 and weighs about one hundred pounds.
It is built like a bank vault, but its mass is offset by some feminine touches. A rolling
wave arches over the oval power button on the front of the thick brushed aluminum
faceplate, gently scalloped heatsinks run the length of each side, and finally, the amp
rests upon four softly rounded cones.

The Pristine
has three pairs of WBT binding posts, but since it was delivered with no instructions, I
could only guess their function. One pair on each side is positive, the other two are
negative (or is it the other way around?). In any case, I simply bolted in my single run
of bi-wire Blue Heavens and powered up. A bright green LED changes to azure about one
minute after the oval power button is pressed, indicating that the amp is ready to play
music. In my Parasound review in this issue I state that dynamics and momentum greatly
improve whenever I connect my Magnepans to a high current device. That occurred here. The
Maggies took to the Pristine like thoroughbreds to a wide open field.

My first
impression was that the Pristine produced a rich, articulate sound. I inserted disc after
disc of pop and rock into my CD player and the Pristine responded with copious amounts of
refined power. Nevertheless, I felt that the amp had much more to offer than drama and
slam. It had a seductive quality that beckoned me to look beyond its polished metal
surface. For example, while listening to The Best of Miles Davis and Gil Evans, I
was not only impressed with the Pristines smooth delivery of power, but found myself
drawn into the music. The amps ability to render details and space without sounding
overly up front was remarkable. Ive heard several expensive amplifiers that were
unbearably revealing, making the listening experience enjoyable with only a limited number
of recordings.

The Pristine
is no such product. The Pristine had a way with shapes and spaces reminiscent of my tubed
Anthem. Images were nearly three dimensional. I say "nearly" because when I
momentarily returned to the Anthem for comparison, musical shapes and spaces ripened to
their fullest, but with nowhere near the refinement and resolution of the Pristine. One
day my father-a big Beatles fan and the main reason for my love of music and sound-came to
visit. We chatted for a while, then listened to the recently-released Beatles 1
CD all the way through. We could easily tell the difference between the hollow body Hofner
bass McCartney used in the early years and the solid body Rickenbacker he favored later.

The jingly
timber of electric twelve-string guitars was rendered as never before. Drums were lively
and present, whether they were rapped hard to keep the beat or gently tapped, as in the
song Something. My father agreed that listening to the Beatles with the Pristine was a
richly rewarding experience. In summary, I found the
Pristine to be a very satisfying and enjoyable amplifier. It produced generous amounts of
power for the most demanding material without ever sounding harsh or confused. In the
fiercely competitive world of high-stakes amplifiers, the Pristine will be one to watch. Victor
Chavira